Pebble Report: Franklin Morales vs Scott Elbert

by Rox Girl on Apr 3, 2007 9:21 AM MDT in Rockpile

I'm going to go over the rest of the links in a little bit, but an article by Chris Constancio at the Hardball Times on the Best Left Handed pitchers under 25 reminded me of something I've been meaning to do for a little while. Frequently you'll see Franklin Morales and the Dodgers' Scott Elbert lumped together as people take a look at their statistics, see the similar rates of high K's and high BB's, read about how they both have scorching heat, and then come to the conclusion that they are in the same boat. Constancio did this today, on Elbert's control problems and why he gave Scott only a "good" ceiling:

Most people don't see this as limiting his ceiling because you can teach a pitcher better mechanics while you cannot teach him the kind of stuff that Elbert has. I view this a bit differently, because realistically very few pitchers completely overcome mechanical/control issues they haven't solved by their third year of professional baseball.

On Morales, who was ranked similarly:

See the above entry on Scott Elbert. The same warnings apply to Morales, another southpaw who does a better job of lighting up the radar gun than throwing strikes.

Alright, first of all, I'm not going to say that I disagree at all with Constancio on the importance of both these pitchers learning to control the strike zone a little better before we can fully expect them to meet their potential, but I am going to point out that there is sufficient reason to believe that Morales' upside is being considerably underestimated relative to Elbert's here.

Okay, a couple of the reasons:

Morales' GB% is considerably higher than Elbert's and regularly over 50%. This is the big one, actually, as pitchers who can both limit the damage caused when the ball is put in play, as well as limiting how often it gets in play are at a considerable premium. Francisco Liriano, Johan Santana, Brandon Webb, these are the kinds of pitchers you hold onto. This aspect is what vaults Franklin from being a potential top of the rotation starter to being a potential Cy Young candidate.
Elbert had a substantially lower than league average BABIP against him last season -particularly after his call-up to Jacksonville- while Morales' (albeit still low) was a little closer relative to league to what we'd expect from starters of their caliber. I'm thinking that in 2007, the luck doesn't hold as well for Elbert as advanced hitters are able to see him more often. What's more, Elbert's high pop-up rate tells me that hitters are getting just underneath, meaning that he's leaving stuff up compared to the GB's induced by Franklin, and in AA hitters started pulling him to left field more, this could spell trouble when he meets even more advanced batters. I think Scott's still highly talented, top of the rotation (#2) material with his pitch repertoire, but the walks plus the elevation of his pitches leave me less high on him by a fair margin than I am on Morales.

This isn't just a homer article, either. I'm okay admitting that Chad Billingsley's a better pitcher now and down the road than Ubaldo Jimenez, for instance, even though I like U-ball a lot. I'm just pointing out that a lot of people are missing some key aspects that separate these two talented LHP's rising in the NL West. The measure that should be taken is to imagine both being able to reduce their walks to an acceptable MLB level and deciding which you would rather have at that point. Neither is nearly there yet, but the answer if you look at everything in total should point you to seeing Morales with the higher potential.

Scott Elbert's Minor League Splits index

Franklin Morales' Minor League Splits

Some targets to be looking at for Franklin's early performance to know if he's on track:

20 BB's or thereabouts allowed for April and May combined. Early projections will have him eclipsing the century mark, or at least coming close to it on walks for the season. If he can manage a 3.5 BB/9 IP or less early, we might have reason to start getting excited.
Similarly, watch the wild pitches and hit batsmen as a sign of his control. Last year he hit ten batters in the first three months, and only one in the last two. He also had 24 WP's on the season, meaning that he was missing low a lot and that he probably didn't have the best of defensive receivers behind the plate. At any rate, a reduction in those early will be a further sign that he's taken a step forward this offseason.
He's maintained at least a K/inning ratio throughout his minor league career, but regression says that should slip below that as he climbs to more advanced levels, as soon as this season. If he can still keep his K rate up, while lowering the walks, we can really start to hope that he'll be able to step into that ace role for the Rockies.

Tweet Comment 11 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Speaking of U-ball

I absolutely cringe when our TV announcers bring up the comparisons that were made between him and Felix Hernandez a couple of seasons back. I hope you guys are all clear that Jimenez won't come close to King Felix's potential in the majors. Jimenez could be a devastating pitcher, and with Morales give us a dynamite one-two punch, but it wouldn't be on the order of Santana/Liriano. Still a very high ceiling, though. Bonderman/Verlander? That's a probably a bit closer to the potential of putting these two together with the massively huge caveat of IF THEY LIVE UP TO THEIR POTENTIAL.

by Rox Girl on Apr 3, 2007 9:33 AM MDT reply actions

Nor would

Jimenez have been able to hold his own in the Majors at 19, like Hernandez did.

by Russ Oates on Apr 3, 2007 9:46 AM MDT up reply actions

Good Points, But...

I think you're not paying enough attention to park factors here. Modesto is a neutral park, and is very forgiving towards home runs. Vero Beach, on the other hand, is a launching pad (1.62 HR park factor). Despite this, Elbert had a better home run rate in Vero than Morales had in Modesto.

Also, Elbert's high pop up rate is directly correlated with that low BABIP. Since pop ups are basically automatic outs, those in turn mean a low BABIP. At the major league level, inducing pop ups is a repeatable skill, and he kept that up in Jacksonville, so I'm not worried about it.

It's going to be hard to compare these two pitchers next year, because last I heard Elbert was going to AAA (a mistake, I think, since he got shelled in Jacksonville) while I have to imagine Morales is only going to AA ball. Elbert still has some obvious flaws in his game, but right now I have to call him the superior prospect.

truebluela.com

by regfairfield @ Purple Row on Apr 3, 2007 9:36 AM MDT reply actions

Nice counter,

Morales' HR rate, meanwhile, is directly affected by his high GB%, as this type of pitcher always will have a higher than normal HR% on balls in play, Webb, Liriano, Santana being no exceptions to the rule. I think you're absolutely right that it will be interesting to see how these two progress against more advanced hitters this next season or two. We'll see who's right on this call.

by Rox Girl on Apr 3, 2007 9:53 AM MDT up reply actions

Re

Is that correct? It seems counter intuitive. From what I remember, it's that all types of pitchers allow similar home run rates on fly balls, but ground ball pitchers surrender less fly balls, and in turn, less home runs. Is there any source for that?

truebluela.com

by regfairfield @ Purple Row on Apr 3, 2007 10:02 AM MDT up reply actions

Unless they have a humidor aiding them...

Sinkerball pitchers will typically score higher rates of HR/F (2006 numbers) than those that allow a lot of fly balls. Santana actually doesn't typically get quite as high on the board as say, W ebb (2005 numbers), but his HR rates have been high compared to his double and hit rates relative to the rest of the AL.

by Rox Girl on Apr 3, 2007 10:24 AM MDT up reply actions

Reasons behind it:

It's mostly because when they miss with the two seamer up, the pitch will be right around belt or chest level, compared to a high four seamer which can go over the catcher's head. The trajectory and spin of a high two seam pitch will lend itself to line drives, and subsequently HR's.

by Rox Girl on Apr 3, 2007 10:28 AM MDT up reply actions

Other News...

I am going to post more in the Morales vs Elbert comparison later, but I have a class in 20 minutes and a paper due today.

But quickly, regarding other news, from the Tulsa World today:
--Herrera's goal is to steal 40+ bases
--Morillo was added to the roster and is officially being moved to the bullpen.
--Reynolds gets the opening nod
--Bright and Beckstead were added to the roster, as were Tino Sanchez and Songster (both placed on DL)

by Rockiesbiggestfan on Apr 3, 2007 10:50 AM MDT reply actions

Random question

But does anyone know which article in the Post featured the pic of Squeaky and her sign? I'll email it to her, she'll get a kick out of it.

Sparks of Dementia Rockies, A's, and Cards coverage by an amateur if very enthusiastic blogmistress, myself.

by Silverblood on Apr 3, 2007 11:06 AM MDT reply actions

Photo #6

In this slide show of images.

by Rox Girl on Apr 3, 2007 11:11 AM MDT up reply actions

Two "not so ironies"

both Elbert and Morales were listed back to back in the top ten prospect lists of both Baseball America, and Baseball Prospects, both splitting the higher ranking (side note: nice article about Morales in the new Baseball America, one that not only speaks well of Morales, but shows what a special gift both Rolando Fernandez and Francisco Cartaya have.)

A couple of points to add, one specifically being the "scouting advantage" Morales brings. While Elbert tops out in the mid-90's and can sit in the low 90's through his outing, something few lefties can do, Morales heat is of the rarest form. Both are said to have outstanding curves, but Morales gets more credit for his change up than Elbert. Both are plus lefties stuff-wise, but as BP puts it, Morales has a once-a-generation arm for a lefty.

Also, most scouts fault Morales' inconsistent mechanics for his sturggles with control, but at the same time, Morales has seen his frame expand quite a bit in the last two years, gaining as much as two inches in height. He's not unlike that athletic teen trying to fight through puberty, trying to adapt his skills to his changing physique. It could be plausible that Morales mechanics will finally set in once his body stops its rapid growth, enabling him to consistenty find a release point and balance in his wind up.

The groundball argument is a big one in my opinion, because a pitcher can have success despite a higher walk rate if the groundball rate is high. The Forecaster guys emphasize pitchers with high K rates with high GB%. A high GB% just gives a pitcher more of a margin for error. The one caveat would have to be that some power guys will lose some of their groundouts as they go up the ladder. Morillo had this problem to an extent, and Daniel Cabrera took a bit of an about face with GB%, as hitters are more accomplished at higher levels will allow a wild pitcher to play into their hands and not pound the first low hard fastball they see into the ground. Morales may be better suited to buck such a trend with the movement he generates on his fastball (I'll get a better look of this when I see him this week in Tulsa).

As for the statistical comparison, I think both are a little young for anything to be concrete regarding their development, but there is still a difference in environments. While the homeparks of each pitcher oppose the other, likewise do the leagues, with the California league being the superior hitting environment to the Florida State league. Elbert's home road split is rather odd for the environment, pitching better at home (corrected in Jacksonville), but Morales' are more in line with the basis of the argument, that the California League is a tougher overall environment. BA also makes note of this in their top 100 prospects issue.

The funny thing about this argument is that it's like asking which pitcher is better between Bedard and Kazmir, in the end, you'd take either one. The stats make the comparison a little closer, but I think Morales has the edge on the scout side, and when you talk potential, you have to go with the superior stuff when the numbers are closer in present value. If O'Dowd swapped Morales for Elbert tomorrow, I can't say I would be dissapointed, but given the choice, I'll take the fireballing Venezuelan.

by David OhNo on Apr 3, 2007 11:26 PM MDT reply actions